You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@maven.apache.org by "Brett Porter (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org> on 2007/11/21 09:42:57 UTC
[jira] Commented: (MRM-588) proxy logging is not always effective
for diagnosing issues
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRM-588?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_114422 ]
Brett Porter commented on MRM-588:
----------------------------------
* Do we consider the target repository id to be important to always log?
yes, even more so than the managed (source) repo
* Do we show the resource (the path) or the artifact (the group:artifact:version:classifier:type key) in the log?
don't care as long as it's consistent. Will there be instances before calculating the artifact that it needs to be logged? What about metadata?
* Do we show in the log a "whats left" list of repositories that can/will be checked next? (and indications if no more proxies are being checked?)
No, just one time log them all. I don't think it should be necessary if the log line aggregates that information which I think is what I was suggesting.
* Do we log the network proxy setting? that it is being used? If so, then at what severity level?
I don't think I want to see it all the time - maybe just when a conn fails.
> proxy logging is not always effective for diagnosing issues
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MRM-588
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MRM-588
> Project: Archiva
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 1.0-beta-4
> Reporter: Brett Porter
> Fix For: 1.1
>
>
> I would like to open discussion for what exactly needs to be logged, and at what level, for proxy issues to be effectively diagnosed. With the current configuration, I was unable to pinpoint some problems easily.
> Some thoughts:
> - don't talk about policies, but state what is happening
> - always include the artifact and repository requested
> - log more if it results in a NotFoundException
> - condense information onto fewer lines where possible (if there are concurrent requests, without an NDC these will start getting mixed up in the logs)
> Here are my thoughts:
> DEBUG Artifact [x/y/z.jar] will not be requested from remote repository [foo] as it didn't match whitelist items
> DEBUG Artifact [x/y/z.jar] will not be requested from remote repository [foo] as it matched blacklist item x/**
> INFO Artifact [x/y/z.jar] requested from managed repository [internal], checking remote repositories [central,java.net], excluding remote repositories [foo]
> Then:
> INFO Artifact [x/y/z.jar] retrieved from remote repository [central], skipping others
> or
> INFO Artifact [x/y/z.jar] not retrieved as it failed post-download policy [bar-policy] (include reason)
> And so on...
> Thoughts?
> An open question is what level to log this at: I feel that it should be at INFO, but that might be too noisy by default. Perhaps the right thing to do here is to add a connector configuration property that says whether to log all requests (and if not, only log at debug level).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira